Printable View
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b2...colmshiny1.jpg
(bit shiny text, maybe bg a bit to)
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b2...lcolmshiny.jpg
(totally shiny)
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b2...lcolmsharp.jpg
(normall)
Tell me wich is best if you want, and what you think about the overall sig.
I would go with the third (normal) one. The first one looks a lot like the third, but the colors in the third one seem to be richer and not as faded. The second one was just to blury.
Overall I like the sig, but it feels almost like there's too much black empty space.
i would go with the 2nd looks the cooloes imo
x2.Quote:
Originally posted by Minion V@Aug 7 2005, 01:36 PM
I would go with the third (normal) one. The first one looks a lot like the third, but the colors in the third one seem to be richer and not as faded.* The second one was just to blury.
Overall I like the sig, but it feels almost like there's too much black empty space.
[snapback]66370[/snapback]
and what is with the current obsession for tiny fonts? They aren't always right for every sig. I'm seeing so many sigs lately with 30-50% dead space.
Work on the composition of your image. I suggest pushing the render to the left and extending the lighter brushwork right. then put a legible font on it.
i like the second one the best....it just looks better
im sorry, but i tottally dont agree with this, and im not gonna do it :P, MORE COMMENTS ARE HIGHLY APPRECIATED THOUGH! :DQuote:
Originally posted by Jefster@Aug 7 2005, 02:56 PM
x2.
and what is with the current obsession for tiny fonts? They aren't always right for every sig. I'm seeing so many sigs lately with 30-50% dead space.
Work on the composition of your image. I suggest pushing the render to the left and extending the lighter brushwork right. then put a legible font on it.
[snapback]66382[/snapback]
